Elmer Discussion Forum

If the restart file was written for step 800 then you can restart from 800, if however it stopped during 800 before the restart data was written then you would have to restart from 799 or the lasted saved step in the restart file. As far as the error Elmer is looking for a mesh named /nobackup/st/p...

Yes, there is a restart capability in Elmer. See chapter 3 of the solver manual https://www.nic.funet.fi/pub/sci/physics/elmer/doc/ElmerSolverManual.pdf I have read that chapter, but Elmer keeps on giving an error. I attached case.sif and output. According to the case.sif, if, for instance, my simu...

kevinarden wrote: ↑08 Jul 2021, 12:39 1. Get more RAM
2. Reduce the problem size
3. Set up/increase the size of a swap file (disk space used as RAM)

Sorry if I bother you again, what is the third point? How may I get it?
-Andrea

kevinarden wrote: ↑08 Jul 2021, 17:13 Yes, there is a restart capability in Elmer.

See chapter 3 of the solver manual

https://www.nic.funet.fi/pub/sci/physic ... Manual.pdf

Hence, should I have done it since I defined the case.sif, right? Could I change the case.sif during the running?
-Andrea

1. Get more RAM 2. Reduce the problem size 3. Set up/increase the size of a swap file (disk space used as RAM) Thanks, Kevin, another question, is there the possibility to extend the number of time steps when a simulation has finished by keeping the results obtained until the last step? Namely, not...

kevinarden wrote: ↑08 Jul 2021, 11:49 I get that error when the machine runs out of memory. You can try mumps or the iterative solver.

Whit an iterative method I don't have good results, mumps gave some problems too. So, can't I o anything about that memory limitation?

Apparently, I have resolved the problem by putting a homogeneous boundary condition in the "Movin wall" (boundary 1): Magnetic Field 1 = 0 Magnetic Field 2 = 0 Magnetic Field 3 = 0 When I have refined the mesh, this error occurred: Error occurred in umf4num: -1.0000000000000000 STOP 1 What...

Hi Lorenze force is for historical reasons here: https://github.com/ElmerCSC/elmerfem/blob/devel/fem/src/Differentials.F90 For your term look at line 181. Seems ok to me. -Peter I have checked in the Hartmann Problem published in the GitHub collection and the results for the Lorentz Force and elect...

Thanks Peter, so I cannot explain why Lorentz force isn’t negative.
Andrea

Hi, I have noted from my simulation that the Lorentz force is in the opposite sign with respect to the real physics of the problem. Indeed, It should be negative in the interface interface=h*h1 I have computed the values by hand following the equations in the description of the model, but I don't ob...